I/II.
http://www.catchnews.com/india-news/ftii-students-come-to-delhi-quot-artistic-contribution-should-be-the-criteria-not-govt-affiliation-quot-1438607382.html

FTII PROTESTS

'We don't want someone with a limited worldview': FTII fight comes to Delhi
DEVIKA BAKSHI @devikabakshi |3 August 2015

For the past 53 days, the students of the Film and Television
Institute of India in Pune have been on strike. "Not a single person
is attending classes," final-year film direction student Ameya Gore
told Catch.

The strike, as described by an email circular, is "against the
questionable appointments made in the apex decision-making body of
FTII - the FTII Society".

It's not just that they are protesting the appointment of Gajendra
Chauhan as Chairman of the Governing Council, and a few other members
who do not seem to be qualified for the post.

This could well be a harbinger of things to come - as the government
interferes in educational institutions and how they are run, students
wary about the detrimental effects of such orders or appointments can
do little but protest.

Which is why on 3 August, a group of FTII students, alumni and
supporters marched from Jantar Mantar to Parliament Street in Delhi to
reaffirm their objection.

As they prepared for the next round of protests, Catch spoke to a few
of the students at the forefront of the protests about their
objections to the appointments, their hopes for FTII and their vision
of art and cinema in India.

Also read: Prayaag Akbar: Nationalism and the art of killing cinema

Neel Mani Kant, Sakshi Gulati and Ameya Gore are final year students
in film direction at FTII.

Why are you protesting the appointments to the FTII society?

Ameya Gore: We believe the appointments are due to a faulty process.
FTII students are selected through a very rigorous selection process.
However when it comes to [selecting] the governing council, the rules
are so loose. They only say that the person should be a person of
eminence in film, television, art, culture and so on.

When we went to the Information & Broadcasting ministry on 3 July, we
made it a point to speak in terms of policy. We asked them to put a
transparent procedure in place for these appointments, so that no
party can push their own people through.

We asked them to keep the FTII Society in a passive state while the
process is revised. A new society should be appointed based on new,
transparent guidelines.

We have written letters asking for a constructive dialogue based on
our demands. Last time we approached them, we were told these
appointments cannot be discussed.

The ministry has said nothing about their credentials. They have
simply said that these appointments were the government's prerogative
and the government has the right to do this.

Is this the first time this process has resulted in objectionable appointments?

Sakshi Gulati: If we look at the kind of appointments that have been
made, usually they have been done with a fair amount of discretion,
even under the previous NDA government.

It was this time that we felt there is something fundamentally wrong
in the process if it can result in these kinds of appointments.

The government should form a committee of experts, which can draw a
set of guidelines for the setting up of the FTII society.

What kind of FTII Society would you like to see?

Sakshi: One with some artistic vision.

The FTII Society handles a lot of key administrative appointments at
the institute. They can also be inspirational, and the ambit of their
exposure can be very wide. We are looking for a society that is more
diverse in terms of the kind of art it picks up.

It's not about high art and low art. When a person like Vinod Khanna
comes into the institute, he has wide exposure.

We don't want someone with a limited world-view and knowledge.

Are you only protesting the appointment of Gajendra Chauhan, or is
there more to it?

Neel Mani Kant: It's not about Gajendra Chauhan only. We are also
protesting the appointments of people like Anagha Ghaisas, Narendra
Pathak and Rahul Solapurkar - all those whose credentials do not
support their appointment.

The same government that appointed Mr Chauhan has also appointed Shyam
Benegal, UR Ananthamurthy and Saeed Mirza. We are just trying to
understand this process, which can appoint people like them and also
Chauhan.

Sakshi: If education had been a priority [for the government], these
appointments would not have happened in the way they have happened.

One thing we've realised is that we are not alone in this discomfort.
If you go to Delhi University, students are frustrated with ad hoc
appointments there. There is a reason why IIT and IIM directors are
resigning. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research found a director,
and the PMO sent them a letter asking them to revise the appointment.

There's a pattern here. The whole country can see it. By calling
protestors ideologues or kids, you're disrespecting their
intelligence.

The average age of FTII student is 25. There are people who have done
Masters degrees. They've voted at least twice. They're quite aware of
what's going on in the country.

'By calling protestors ideologues or kids, you're disrespecting their
intelligence'

Perhaps we are naive to believe that the right to protest and ask
questions is a right given to us by democracy. We are not engaging in
character assassination. We are simply raising questions about the
process of appointments.

Why do you think these people are unsuited to their positions?

Neel Kant: What is Chauhan's background? He has acted in a TV serial
and some soft porn films. He does not show any vision or cinematic
knowledge. If a person does not show any understanding of cinema, any
vision for cinema, how can he head this institution?

People like Jahanu Baruah and Saeed Mirza have been associated with
FTII as chairmen. These people have worked extensively in the world of
cinema. They have been associated with bringing a certain type of
cinema to India.

Ameya: Anagha Ghaisas was taken to court. She had stolen someone's
work. The court said she had no knowledge of shooting, editing and
direction and no sense of the difference between documentary and
fiction. Someone like her would have been eliminated in the first
round of the FTII entrance exam.

Ms Ghaisas has continuously referred to an incident where Mr Mahesh
Bhatt [a former chairman of the FTII governing council] said that the
students should study pornography. saying that 'this is what goes on
in FTII.'

She was talking about pornography and how it's bad, and of course it's
bad, but only when it's done for titillation. In film school we don't
watch [film] to be titillated, we study it. She does not understand
that.

She keeps talking about discipline and ethics. In art schools, nudes
are painted. Somebody's personal idea of morality shouldn't come in
the way of academics.

On various talk shows, she and the others have admitted that they
really don't have any knowledge of film and art. Whenever they are
cornered, they say, 'this is an administrative position,' and 'what
the FTII really needs is discipline.'

Interacting with them on various talk shows, we found that under the
name of discipline, and because they constantly dodged questions on
freedom of expression, they had a very narrow-minded outlook and don't
have the kind of liberal values that are required in a film school.

Neel Kant: Narendra Pathak has headed the ABVP for the longest time.
ABVP is involved in a court case involving a screening of Jai Bhim
Comrade, a National Award-winning film by Anand Patwardhan, at the
Film Archive of India [near FTII].

ABVP members accosted students coming from the screening, telling them
they were anti-national, then started beating them up. FTII students
went to the police to file an FIR; ABVP people were already there and
they filed a counter-FIR.

At the time, Pathak said [to the press]: "In anti-nationals ko toh
sabak sikhana padhega (We will have to teach these anti-nationals a
lesson)."

Is your objection partly to their political and ideological leanings?

Ameya: It's not like we don't want people to have a political stance.
It's not that we only want apolitical people to come to FTII.

When Mr Vinod Khanna, also from the BJP, was chairman, there was never
any protest against him. Because he's from the industry and has a
liberal mindset, he understands the space a little better.

But when you have someone like Mr Chauhan, who says 'Modi is an avatar
of god Vishnu and was born to vanquish evil,' I don't think he will
ever stand up against him, even if that means compromising the
students' interests. And there are times when political interests and
student interests clash.

When students were protesting against the privatisation of FTII in
2010, the chairman Mr UR Ananathamurthy stood up with the students
against privatisation and the institute wasn't privatised. This made
it possible for a middle-class person like me to continue studying
here.

[On one of the talk shows,] I even asked Mr Pathak, 'If I make a film
critical of Modi, will you allow its screening?'

He said, 'if the film is in the larger interest of the society, the
nation and doesn't hurt anybody's sentiments, only then we'll allow
you to screen it.'

We all know which organisations' sentiments get hurt at the press of a button.

What's your vision for cinema in this country?

Sakshi: I want to work within Bollywood and make the kind of films
that will show the truth of the world as it is. I don't want to change
the world exactly, but I want to make films that have a certain
honesty and truth to them.

I really feel that if there is a character that is honest, if the
stories are very honest, they end up making a mark. That's why a
Lunchbox and a Killa end up making a mark.

Do you consider freedom of expression paramount?

Ameya: In an art school, definitely. We need to understand people's
world-views though their art. That's why we do it in an academic
setup, so that we can study it and not pass judgements.

What is your vision for education at FTII?

Ameya: Everybody is saying these appointments are supposed to be
political, that every government does this, every government puts its
own people in these positions.

But their artistic contributions need to be the most important
criteria, not their affiliation with the government.

For a government that is talking about vikas, I don't understand why
higher education is not one of its topmost priorities. And if it is
one of its topmost priorities, then we need our best people in these
positions.

'We all know which organisations' sentiments get hurt at the press of a button'

How do you determine the significance of the artistic contribution?

Ameya: If you look at people like Adoor Gopalakrishnan or Shyam
Benegal or Saeed Mirza, these people have been the faces of Indian
cinema, they have represented Indian cinema. It's not just that they
are famous.

It is pointless to compare them with someone like Mr Chauhan, because
he has by no means done anything revolutionary in cinema or
television. He is also out of touch. He has, in recent years, mostly
been part of the political sphere.

[In an interview somewhere] Mr Chauhan has said: "Jo chal jaata hai
voh A-grade cinema hota hai (whatever works at the box-office is
A-grade cinema)".

This market-driven approach he's talking about is completely in
conflict with the purpose of the film institute. FTII's vision
statement talks about alternative cinema and creating independent,
thinking filmmakers.

Mr Chauhan was asked, 'what kind of cinema do you like?' He said, '3
Idiots'. He was asked, 'what about world cinema?' He said, 'I don't
want to say that on record; I am only involved with Indian cinema.'

A few years back, the Polish filmmaker Krzysztof Zanussi, had come
down to FTII for our film festival. About three years ago, we started
our own film festival, the Students Film Festival of India. A lot of
international students also come and screen their work here.

And yet we have a chairman who doesn't even want to talk about
international cinema.

What kind of cinema do you want to make?

Ameya: I personally like very simple work. I like the work of Abbas
Kiarostami. He is, by the way, the head of the Children's Film Board
in Iran, whereas we have Mr Mukesh Khanna.

When [Khanna] was asked about the FTII issue, he said that if he was
in-charge of a school and if he made someone the principal of the
school and the children had a problem with the principal, they should
leave the school. He comes from this mindset where education is just
something to be transmitted to students.

I believe in honest and personal cinema, which transforms the
filmmaker and the crew themselves. And in this process, it
automatically becomes a socio-political statement.

II.
http://www.newsx.com/nation-at-9/8075-nation-at-9-ftii-student-protest-turn-completely-political

Nation at 9: FTII student protest turn completely political
By NewsX Bureau
| Tuesday, August 4, 2015 - 10:23

[Video]

Around 500 activists and students of the Film & Television Institute
of India (FTII) on Monday intensified their protest against the
appointment of Gajendra Chauhan and four other members with alleged
BJP links. The protesters marched from Jantar Mantar to Parliament
Street.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to